<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Sequestering Carbon Deep Within the Earth</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2008/03/03/geo-sequestration/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2008/03/03/geo-sequestration/</link>
	<description>Blogging the science and policy of global warming</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 07:00:06 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: climatewiz</title>
		<link>http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2008/03/03/geo-sequestration/comment-page-1/#comment-6348</link>
		<dc:creator>climatewiz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Feb 2010 00:01:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2008/03/03/geo-sequestration/#comment-6348</guid>
		<description>I see you removed both of my posts. C&#039;mon... a little well needed truth concerning the bloviates touting bogus &quot;peer review&quot; seem to be needed now.  

 &quot;What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way.&quot;
                Bertrand Russell   Global warming = myth</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I see you removed both of my posts. C&#039;mon&#8230; a little well needed truth concerning the bloviates touting bogus &#034;peer review&#034; seem to be needed now.  </p>
<p> &#034;What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires &#8212; desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way.&#034;<br />
                Bertrand Russell   Global warming = myth</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Clean Coal? &#171; Crossroads West</title>
		<link>http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2008/03/03/geo-sequestration/comment-page-1/#comment-1987</link>
		<dc:creator>Clean Coal? &#171; Crossroads West</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Jan 2009 07:55:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2008/03/03/geo-sequestration/#comment-1987</guid>
		<description>[...] Climate 411 - from the Environmental Defense Fund Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)King Coal - where&#8217;s my clean coal?Al Gore - Cars, Climate and the Clean Coal &#8220;Unicorn&#8221;FutureGen &#8220;Cleanish Coal&#8221; Plant Cancelled Environmentalists Win Big EPA Ruling on Coal Emissions [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Climate 411 &#8211; from the Environmental Defense Fund Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)King Coal &#8211; where&rsquo;s my clean coal?Al Gore &#8211; Cars, Climate and the Clean Coal &#034;Unicorn&#034;FutureGen &#034;Cleanish Coal&#034; Plant Cancelled Environmentalists Win Big EPA Ruling on Coal Emissions [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: aelemay</title>
		<link>http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2008/03/03/geo-sequestration/comment-page-1/#comment-1746</link>
		<dc:creator>aelemay</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Aug 2008 15:21:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2008/03/03/geo-sequestration/#comment-1746</guid>
		<description>Is there any evidence that reducing CO2 concentration in the atmosphere has any effect on global temperatures?  The GHG theory was developed during a warming period from 1975 to 1998.  If the theory had been curve fitted for the period of 1940 to 1975, it seems an equally strong case might be made that increasing CO2 concentration cools the climate, and, in fact the scientists of the day thought that cooling was the big climatological crisis.

And, a similar argument might be made for 1998 to the present.  When observations of warming or cooling can be made in the face of increasing concentration it is easy to understand why those scientists who count sunspots and sucessfully predict future climate changes might have it right.  Why is it, that none of the IPCC models have ever correctly predicted anything correctly except after fiddling with the parameters.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Is there any evidence that reducing CO2 concentration in the atmosphere has any effect on global temperatures?  The GHG theory was developed during a warming period from 1975 to 1998.  If the theory had been curve fitted for the period of 1940 to 1975, it seems an equally strong case might be made that increasing CO2 concentration cools the climate, and, in fact the scientists of the day thought that cooling was the big climatological crisis.</p>
<p>And, a similar argument might be made for 1998 to the present.  When observations of warming or cooling can be made in the face of increasing concentration it is easy to understand why those scientists who count sunspots and sucessfully predict future climate changes might have it right.  Why is it, that none of the IPCC models have ever correctly predicted anything correctly except after fiddling with the parameters.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sheryl Canter</title>
		<link>http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2008/03/03/geo-sequestration/comment-page-1/#comment-944</link>
		<dc:creator>Sheryl Canter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Mar 2008 16:00:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2008/03/03/geo-sequestration/#comment-944</guid>
		<description>Wyoming just passed a pair of bills that, as the governor said, &quot;puts itself in the forefront of carbon sequestration legislation.&quot;

http://redgreenandblue.org/2008/03/18/wyoming-passes-carbon-capture-sequestration-legislation/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wyoming just passed a pair of bills that, as the governor said, &#034;puts itself in the forefront of carbon sequestration legislation.&#034;</p>
<p><a href="http://redgreenandblue.org/2008/03/18/wyoming-passes-carbon-capture-sequestration-legislation/" rel="nofollow">http://redgreenandblue.org/2008/03/18/wyoming-passes-carbon-capture-sequestration-legislation/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: earthscientist</title>
		<link>http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2008/03/03/geo-sequestration/comment-page-1/#comment-910</link>
		<dc:creator>earthscientist</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Mar 2008 04:49:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2008/03/03/geo-sequestration/#comment-910</guid>
		<description>Ms. Canter, Surely you would,as an information officer in your organization quest for all points of view and points of science to have a fair and balanced process to bring the public the very best of information.

The climate science folks you support as the only paradigm have many problems with their assumptions and that has been tasked by many science folks who also have enough intellect to look at the evidence of the past.

Your Mr. Wangs assertion that those in the Inhofe report just work for the oil company is just a journalistic emotive ploy that really does just belong in the Star. 

Responsible science folks do not need to place the bad guy in their science information to assure that their faction dis-avows anything that is not approved by their Phd. person.

So,just for the record, I definitely do not get any process from the oil companies except for interference in my office and the deaths of many,so you might assume I have an ax to grind and would suppot any position that makes them the bad guy,but I cannot ,as they are responsible for many improprieties,but certainly not Global Warming.

If the science departments that churned out the &quot;Climate Scientists&quot; had been trained to proper grid science,the controversies would be much smaller and economic damage would not be such an issue.

NASA folks are tier two scientists to me and they are not given so much information that would change their paradigm for a very good reason by a contingent of other folks that do not have your best interest in mind.

I am not from that faction,and they have caused my faction untold trouble on the planet,they really do not want things fixed.

So for the record again,my contingent does want things fixed and we work diligently everyday in that direction.

As with the carbon sequestration ,petro price and military actions to protect that paradigm and those that actually do task for their directives when they beat everyone to death with GHG mis-information to play right into their hands need  it beat into their consciousness daily so as to put a big crack in their loop.

We desire and demand less carbon output,we desire and demand that our aquifers not be poisoned daily,we desire and demand the &quot;Faction&quot; I speak about stop putting flouride in all of the consumables for the slow task down of intellect and the infusion of mercury products into our children to create a further tasking down of intellect and to stop spraying the H viuses that now have killed 50 percent of the bees so needed for our flowering foods from what we call lifters that can be seen all over if you know how to look for them,an F-16 is a Falcon and the lifters that are anti grav that spray are Tigers.

So while every science tasker is busy screaming about GHG,Rome burns and more and more people and animals are killed down daily.

Please see some of my other taskings on this 4-11 blog for some ponderings about grid science as that grid has been used against factions and countries for a long time now,along with their playing with crop circles.

&quot;Proper&quot; crop circles are ones that science folks inspect and find no foot inervention and stalks bent without breaking and enhanced growth also. They are built at grid nodes and the Nitrogens frequency that provides that gas for this planet is engaged at that spot and so enhanced growth and that little tid-bit is just to flow into the tid-bit that oxygens flow constantly into the planet also and the funny thing is that the Lifter boys do not get as much efficiacy from their spray because that node ozone cleans the air and kills the much of the viral load they put out.

Just like the &quot;Light Frequency&quot; that cleans up your favorite hot tub and gives your fav hair stylist their clean cabinet. Why even Wal-Mart uses light frequency ozone in their meat cases to deplete bacterial and viral load.

Guess what the secret is about hydrogens frequency???

They( the faction I speak to) just shudders and kills everyday to keep that secret in GE&#039;s safe.

Conspiracy theorist, NOT.... Have a nice Day !!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ms. Canter, Surely you would,as an information officer in your organization quest for all points of view and points of science to have a fair and balanced process to bring the public the very best of information.</p>
<p>The climate science folks you support as the only paradigm have many problems with their assumptions and that has been tasked by many science folks who also have enough intellect to look at the evidence of the past.</p>
<p>Your Mr. Wangs assertion that those in the Inhofe report just work for the oil company is just a journalistic emotive ploy that really does just belong in the Star. </p>
<p>Responsible science folks do not need to place the bad guy in their science information to assure that their faction dis-avows anything that is not approved by their Phd. person.</p>
<p>So,just for the record, I definitely do not get any process from the oil companies except for interference in my office and the deaths of many,so you might assume I have an ax to grind and would suppot any position that makes them the bad guy,but I cannot ,as they are responsible for many improprieties,but certainly not Global Warming.</p>
<p>If the science departments that churned out the &#034;Climate Scientists&#034; had been trained to proper grid science,the controversies would be much smaller and economic damage would not be such an issue.</p>
<p>NASA folks are tier two scientists to me and they are not given so much information that would change their paradigm for a very good reason by a contingent of other folks that do not have your best interest in mind.</p>
<p>I am not from that faction,and they have caused my faction untold trouble on the planet,they really do not want things fixed.</p>
<p>So for the record again,my contingent does want things fixed and we work diligently everyday in that direction.</p>
<p>As with the carbon sequestration ,petro price and military actions to protect that paradigm and those that actually do task for their directives when they beat everyone to death with GHG mis-information to play right into their hands need  it beat into their consciousness daily so as to put a big crack in their loop.</p>
<p>We desire and demand less carbon output,we desire and demand that our aquifers not be poisoned daily,we desire and demand the &#034;Faction&#034; I speak about stop putting flouride in all of the consumables for the slow task down of intellect and the infusion of mercury products into our children to create a further tasking down of intellect and to stop spraying the H viuses that now have killed 50 percent of the bees so needed for our flowering foods from what we call lifters that can be seen all over if you know how to look for them,an F-16 is a Falcon and the lifters that are anti grav that spray are Tigers.</p>
<p>So while every science tasker is busy screaming about GHG,Rome burns and more and more people and animals are killed down daily.</p>
<p>Please see some of my other taskings on this 4-11 blog for some ponderings about grid science as that grid has been used against factions and countries for a long time now,along with their playing with crop circles.</p>
<p>&#034;Proper&#034; crop circles are ones that science folks inspect and find no foot inervention and stalks bent without breaking and enhanced growth also. They are built at grid nodes and the Nitrogens frequency that provides that gas for this planet is engaged at that spot and so enhanced growth and that little tid-bit is just to flow into the tid-bit that oxygens flow constantly into the planet also and the funny thing is that the Lifter boys do not get as much efficiacy from their spray because that node ozone cleans the air and kills the much of the viral load they put out.</p>
<p>Just like the &#034;Light Frequency&#034; that cleans up your favorite hot tub and gives your fav hair stylist their clean cabinet. Why even Wal-Mart uses light frequency ozone in their meat cases to deplete bacterial and viral load.</p>
<p>Guess what the secret is about hydrogens frequency???</p>
<p>They( the faction I speak to) just shudders and kills everyday to keep that secret in GE&#039;s safe.</p>
<p>Conspiracy theorist, NOT&#8230;. Have a nice Day !!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sheryl Canter</title>
		<link>http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2008/03/03/geo-sequestration/comment-page-1/#comment-895</link>
		<dc:creator>Sheryl Canter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Mar 2008 18:31:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2008/03/03/geo-sequestration/#comment-895</guid>
		<description>skeptic1, what you write is simply untrue. I&#039;ve posted many links for you with proof. You are spreading misinformation.

It is also untrue that &quot;so many reputable scientists&quot; agree with your fringe view. For more, see this post:

http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2008/01/04/inhofe_report/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>skeptic1, what you write is simply untrue. I&#039;ve posted many links for you with proof. You are spreading misinformation.</p>
<p>It is also untrue that &#034;so many reputable scientists&#034; agree with your fringe view. For more, see this post:</p>
<p><a href="http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2008/01/04/inhofe_report/" rel="nofollow">http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2008/01/04/inhofe_report/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: skeptic1</title>
		<link>http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2008/03/03/geo-sequestration/comment-page-1/#comment-885</link>
		<dc:creator>skeptic1</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 Mar 2008 04:58:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2008/03/03/geo-sequestration/#comment-885</guid>
		<description>There seems to be quite a bit of evidence that CO2 is a very small driver of global warming, that it FOLLOWS by hundreds of years the warming after the end of the ice age.  The processes causing global warming are not well understood, and they appear to be natural.  (we&#039;ve had many global warming and cooling periods).  Why are so many reputable scientists saying man is NOT the cause of this global warming, and why does it appear that the recent temp rise has peaked?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There seems to be quite a bit of evidence that CO2 is a very small driver of global warming, that it FOLLOWS by hundreds of years the warming after the end of the ice age.  The processes causing global warming are not well understood, and they appear to be natural.  (we&#039;ve had many global warming and cooling periods).  Why are so many reputable scientists saying man is NOT the cause of this global warming, and why does it appear that the recent temp rise has peaked?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Environmental Capital - WSJ.com : Green Ink: Oil's Plateau</title>
		<link>http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2008/03/03/geo-sequestration/comment-page-1/#comment-865</link>
		<dc:creator>Environmental Capital - WSJ.com : Green Ink: Oil's Plateau</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Mar 2008 12:50:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2008/03/03/geo-sequestration/#comment-865</guid>
		<description>[...] how cap-and-trade schemes and permit auctioning work, over at Grist. Environmental Defense looks at clean coal technologies as a transition to cleaner energy. And The Oil Drum explores the economics of wind [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] how cap-and-trade schemes and permit auctioning work, over at Grist. Environmental Defense looks at clean coal technologies as a transition to cleaner energy. And The Oil Drum explores the economics of wind [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Climate 411 &#187; Sequestering Carbon in Soil and Trees - Blogs &#38; Podcasts - Environmental Defense</title>
		<link>http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2008/03/03/geo-sequestration/comment-page-1/#comment-859</link>
		<dc:creator>Climate 411 &#187; Sequestering Carbon in Soil and Trees - Blogs &#38; Podcasts - Environmental Defense</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Mar 2008 20:50:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2008/03/03/geo-sequestration/#comment-859</guid>
		<description>[...] 1. Biological Carbon Sequestration 2. Geological Carbon Sequestration [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] 1. Biological Carbon Sequestration 2. Geological Carbon Sequestration [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
